Scully Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Completely understandable emotion. But if you think about it - Vengeance was the motivation for Lee Rigby's murderers. Fair enough, but lee Rigby wasn't guilty of any offences as determined by a court of law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secretagentmole Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) No. The Lee Rigby case sure boiled the blood and frankly was amazed they were not both shot dead by the armed police that attended.....whereas the lad in North London was shot...but once arrested I believe the death penalty to be barbaric. Had a soldier come out of Woolich barracks and seen the Rigby incident and shot them both then I would have had no issue however... If you shoot people like that they become Martyrs and an inspiration to others. As a couple rotting away inside, they are less of an inspiration and more of a deterrent! My view is that they should be kept in solitary confinement to prevent their radicalising other Muslims who are in the same jail! Edited February 27, 2014 by secretagentmole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Fair enough, but lee Rigby wasn't guilty of any offences as determined by a court of law. Yes - this is why vengeance has no place in the rule of law. Saying that - I think sentencing is just too random. Everyone who acts in a cold blooded pre-meditated murder should get what these guys got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Yes - this is why vengeance has no place in the rule of law. Saying that - I think sentencing is just too random. Everyone who acts in a cold blooded pre-meditated murder should get what these guys got. Which is why prosecutions are undertaken by those who have no emotional link to the victim or perpetrator, but when people feel the sentence doesn't fit the crime it can generate a need for vengenace. That is what vigiliantism is all about; retribution for the crimes of those leniently dealt with by the courts. Vengeance may have no roll in sentencing, but anger at injustice certainly plays a part in retribution. The murderers of Lee Rigby weren't concerned about the rule of law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nial Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 This thread always goes the same way,if you go down the execution route you will eventually execute the wrong person,and it is unacceptable that an innocent person should die. A moral dilemma: What's worse, killing innocent people or allowing more innocent people to die through lack of action? From... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/normantebbit/100181673/a-return-to-capital-punishment-it-is-time-we-thought-once-more-about-the-deterrent-effect/ "However, there is yet another consideration. I have kept track year by year since the death penalty was suspended then abolished of the number of people who have been killed by persons previously convicted of homicide. It has averaged three people a year. About 150 people killed because their killers have been freed to kill again. Would our courts have sentenced to death thee innocent people a year, year in year out? I doubt it" ? Nial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 A moral dilemma: What's worse, killing innocent people or allowing more innocent people to die through lack of action? From... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/normantebbit/100181673/a-return-to-capital-punishment-it-is-time-we-thought-once-more-about-the-deterrent-effect/ "However, there is yet another consideration. I have kept track year by year since the death penalty was suspended then abolished of the number of people who have been killed by persons previously convicted of homicide. It has averaged three people a year. About 150 people killed because their killers have been freed to kill again. Would our courts have sentenced to death thee innocent people a year, year in year out? I doubt it" ? Nial People were hanged when the death penalty was in place, so it is not the deterrent that it is portrayed,you should also take into account the increase in population when compiling statistics as the population has grown massively. As for people being released and committing murder that is down to the system and its inadequacy's and this should be looked at and corrected but capital punishment is not the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) You only have to look at the USA they have a relatively high murder rate for a 1st world western country. They have capital punishment - so why are they near the top of the list? Lets also not forget too that often capital punishment is used as a bargaining tool in plea bargaining for a 'lesser' sentence. Unless you are OJ or can afford a great legal team, you are often given a choice. Plea bargain for life, or we go to court and seek the death penalty. So if you're poor - and truly innocent, but perhaps there is some circumstantial evidence against you, or you're just scared (who wouldn't be), and can't afford a lawyer what do you do? Does your lowly paid public defender suggest maybe plead guilty and take the lesser charge - otherwise you might die. Tough choice, and IMHO and immoral one. Edited February 27, 2014 by aris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secretagentmole Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Not all states have the death penalty (18 do not). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Not all states have the death penalty (18 do not). There is a Federal Death Penalty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_the_United_States_federal_government Edited February 27, 2014 by aris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claycrasher Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 My personal opinion is that it should be brought in for the most serious of crimes (eg. Mass murder) but only when 100% proof that the person accused is guilty, otherwise it's normal punishments. Anyhow that's my opinion. James + 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
955i Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 your kidding Not really, consider the amount of convictions in total each year, not just for murder rape etc, then think about how many are wrongful. I would imagine the number would be very small in comparison. And apologies it was meant to say 0.1 not 0.01 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Not really, consider the amount of convictions in total each year, not just for murder rape etc, then think about how many are wrongful. I would imagine the number would be very small in comparison. And apologies it was meant to say 0.1 not 0.01 You never find out how many are wrong unless the person has a lot of guts, money, patience, or all of those to take it through the courts. If you are dead, you are unlikely to be able to do this either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Prison cells and prisoners get better accommodation and food than i do in the Army, its pathetic really Is that really true though? Have you ever been to a prison? I doubt many people here have. In a past life I spent quite a lot of time in numerous prisons in the UK and I can honestly say that I would not want to spend an enforced sojourn in any of them, for all the study and pool tables in the world. our prisons are like butlins Only in the sense that both prisons and Butlins are complete ****-holes. EDIT: Back to the OP, I doubt we will ever see it back and I wouldn't welcome it. Edited February 27, 2014 by Thunderbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bb Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 My view is that they should be kept in solitary confinement to prevent their radicalising other Muslims who are in the same jail! Either that or out with everybody else in a jail full of nasty hard cases and one-eyed warders. Amazingly slippery, some stair cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Either that or out with everybody else in a jail full of nasty hard cases and one-eyed warders. Amazingly slippery, some stair cases. i don't think they will last long inside (hope) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Funker Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Prison cells and prisoners get better accommodation and food than i do in the Army, its pathetic really It is pathetic, however they have no freedom and that's pretty much the most important thing any of us have. I agree prison should be tougher though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) You can tell how civilised a country is by the way they treat their prisoners . We are proberbly the most civilised country in the world . Incidently take it from a fully trained hangmans assistant that the death penalty was a big deterant amongest the criminal classes . Harnser. Edited February 27, 2014 by Harnser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prawn Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 You can tell how civilised a country is by the way they treat their prisoners . We are proberbly the most civilised country in the world . Incidently take it from a fully trained hangmans assistant that the death penalty was a big deterant amongest the criminal classes . Harnser. However the Romans used the death penalty a lot? Does that mean the country was uncivilised? No it was extremely civilised for the time. James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 As for people being released and committing murder that is down to the system and its inadequacy's and this should be looked at and corrected but capital punishment is not the answer. There are no recorded incidencies of an executed murderer being freed to murder again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 There are no recorded incidencies of an executed murderer being freed to murder again. theres no recorded incidences of a executed innocent man ever walking out the gates Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 There are no recorded incidencies of an executed murderer being freed to murder again. True, but there are incidents of people being found guilty of murder , only to be cleared after new evidence. In the past they would have being executed. It won't be brought back in the UK so its hardly worth being disgusted. Pushing for stronger sentences would be more useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prawn Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Yea, an eye for an eye..simples. An eye for an eye makes the world blind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodcock11 Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) True, but there are incidents of people being found guilty of murder , only to be cleared after new evidence. In the past they would have being executed. It won't be brought back in the UK so its hardly worth being disgusted. Pushing for stronger sentences would be more useful. True, but there are incidents of people being found guilty of murder , only to be cleared after new evidence. In the past they would have being executed. It won't be brought back in the UK so its hardly worth being disgusted. Pushing for stronger sentences would be more useful. You are so right - I cannot subscribe to the view "beyond all reasonable doubt" when it comes to the death penalty - a life for a life is the law of the jungle and has no place in any civilised society. I agree that a convicted murderer is outwith civilised society but that is no excuse for descending to their level. The whole life term - which means exactly that - given to one of Fusilier Lee Rigby's killers means that person will spend the rest of his life behind bars with no hope of release - and I suspect his life will be a living hell. The other has been sentenced to 45 years before any review and that is almost as final. In view of the evidence that led to their conviction, there is almost no chance that they will ever have a successful appeal and, if I were a betting man, I cannot envisage any situation in the future [sentencing will only get tougher] where any Home Secretary will review their cases and set them free. Other convictions for murder are not so clear cut so, like it as one may, the death penalty is just not option - some may not approve of that, but that is what living in a civilised country means. If they do not like it, go to China or an ever decreasing number of States in the US, and a number of other pretty grim places, where the death penalty still applies...... Edited February 27, 2014 by woodcock11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) If you shoot people like that they become Martyrs and an inspiration to others. As a couple rotting away inside, they are less of an inspiration and more of a deterrent! My view is that they should be kept in solitary confinement to prevent their radicalising other Muslims who are in the same jail! sounds sensible solitarty is a good idea Edited February 27, 2014 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 True, but there are incidents of people being found guilty of murder , only to be cleared after new evidence. In the past they would have being executed. But we aren't talking about the past, we are talking about now. If DNA finger printing is all it's cracked up to be then guilt in cases where forensic evidence is available can prove guilt beyond all doubt. There are also cases where even without DNA evidence the perpetrator is blatantly guilty. There is no doubt about the guilt of Ian Brady, Peter Sutcliffe or Ian Huntley is there? They aren't kept in prison 'just in case' they're guilty, no more than they haven't been executed 'just in case' they're innocent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.